Not sure I follow that, Neo. However, here are a few that I *have* seen (you decide which count as "classics"):

High Noon Red River Stagecoach (B&W version) A Fistful of Dollars For a Few Dollars More The Good, the Bad and the Ugly The Wild Bunch Unforgiven Dances With Wolves (kinda counts) The Searchers High Plains Drifter 3:10 To Yuma (both versions) Silverado Pale Rider Hang 'Em High

Too many so-called "classics" of the post-1975 period I have never seen and don't really have a desire to see so I'm better off listing some classics of the Golden and Silver Age that I have never seen and have never been that inclined to see.

The African Queen The Quiet Man Marty On The Waterfront Stagecoach (1939) (Most western movies I have little interest in, frankly)

"I like lots of westerns. However, there's THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE, then all the rest."

PhiladelphiaSon, I love westerns as well, but I haven't seen enough of the ones that are considered to be the truly greatest to make the statement that you just did. But...until I see the rest, I agree with you!

Well I freely admit I made room for Raquel's, even though I felt each of them didn't use her to her full potential. (Though she gets some great moments in "100 Rifles" and "Hannie Caulder", less so in "Bandolero")

I think the reason why the genre has been hard for me to connect with is because as a child in the late 1970s that was when the western as a genre in both film and TV had pretty much vanished. The long-running TV westerns were not rerun staples in those days and I think that may have also rubbed off a bit in terms of my willingness to experience movies of the same genre.

I've broadened out in the years since then but more so in the TV genre where "Gunsmoke" and "The Big Valley" have become favorites (but not "Bonanza" or "Rawhide"), but movies remain a tougher case. It might depend more on the subject matter, the cast etc. for me to feel compelled to give it a go. Even as much as I enjoy Heston's movies, I have still not seen "Will Penny" for instance.

I would definitely recommend MARTY-55- A heartwarming well done touching tale, that is so true to life, ON THE WATERFRONT-54- A gritty hard nose film with a great ending. Both films have fine acting and solid tech credits.

[ Occasionally, one concedes, it can simply be profoundly subjective in the sense of an enbedded professionally-personal or personally-professional abhorence of the entity so that no matter how 'acclaimed' their output is, it remains entrenched anathma in the extremis (the "Reservoir Dogs" carbon-unit where we're concerned; no matter how many Best Screenplay accolades he collects, we'll NEVER see anything with his name onnit). ]

What is a classic? Is there a person wise enough who can say a classic is written in stone and is undisputable a classic? Is a classic a film which is seem by the masses for reasons that are questionable, [finance, influence , luck, opportunity] etc etc? I remember years ago when a friend said, WHY DID THE EXORCIST gross more money and was seen by millions of more people then NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD?Well like many answers, it may seen more complex but it can be broken down into a logical simple line or paragraph. It got booked in thousands of more theatres worldwide. even if DEAD, in every theatre it was playing in was shown to pack houses and loads of people banging on the doors to get in from the outside it would loose the game of exposure to the EXORCIST.Is a classic a film which has been liking by so called important people in the media[mainstream critics] and those powerbrokers of the media who words are exposed through all the major media channels?. Maybe though, a classic is like so many things in life really is just an opinion and can and should never be put in books of facts.One person sees STAR WARS A HUNDRED TIMES and treat it like GOD'S GIFT, another falls asleep on first viewing. One person thinks GONE WITH THE WIND is a great film, another thinks it is a overblown bore, Who is to say? WHO IS TO SAY?

We clearly prefaced our question with the subjective caveat "universally extolled as such' - which means the collective consensus believes such and such is this and not that - or from an Individual perspective (which merely substitutes the personal from the group).

Since this is a viewpoint usually brought forth from you, Dan, we'd counter your hand, raise it and ask this:

WHAT IS AN 'OPINION'!?!

That's why we've ne'er subscribed and been profoundly bemused - tho we still endeavor our best to abide by the imposed regulations Ally oversees - to 'politics' being solely connected with elected officials, groups, rules, regulations or philosophical ideologies.

[ Any and Everything personal is always political. ]

So when the quest is specifically aimed at Why some films are richly regarded, to us the criteria is pure simplicity:

It's stood the test of TIME as to its quality, values, artistic achievement, elevated entertainment quotient and a universal connection which crosses each and every limited label possible yet still triumphs by spotlighting, accentuating, rewarding, transcending and connecting all that makes EVERYONE Human.